BUSINESS AND HUMAN RIGHTS / Šturma, Mozetic (eds)

be without further digressions. In the case of high-density standards, their capacity for producing the main legal effects is immediate, with the exception of legislative intervention. 26 By their turn, the norms that favor social legal benefits, by some considered as of a programmatic nature, under this view, shall enjoy a relative density, in a minimum normativity that requires legislative intervention for the full achievement of the objectives of the norm. At this point, that sounds quite contradictory with the thought of Mello, 27 to whom social rights, those rights aimed at the realization of Social Justice, have the capability to produce legal effects immediately, even though they differ from other rights by the effective charges. As for a sort of a last analysis of the problem, it is possible to affirm the existence of na umbilical relationship between the legal and social effectiveness of social rights and their economic expression. Although a respectful group of authors support the positive dimension of all fundamental rights, because the negative rights also represent high financial costs to the State, the problematic gains body in the positive rights or – better called and know – rights to benefits, because their realization depends significantly more on the allocation of resources. It is imperative that Torres, 28 for whom the doctrine of the effectiveness of social rights represents a legacy of the German social-democratic constitutionalism of the 1950s and 1970s, during a period of great western economic growth, as well as of the Portuguese Canotilhian constitutional dirigisme. It states, however, that the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 was paradigmatic for the transition from the conception of maximum effectiveness to the thesis of the indivisibility of human rights. In terms of the effectiveness of social rights, the prohibition of retrogression deserves to be analyzed. Understanding the concept and scope of this principle is justified by the frequent emptying of the effectiveness and effectiveness of social rights from state retrogressive measures, especially in times of economic crisis. The principle of prohibition or prohibition of retrogression is a legacy of legal- constitutional dogmatism that envisions the scope of protection, limits and limits to the limits of fundamental rights as three important characteristics for the realization of rights. Along the same lines as Goldschmidt, 29 the recognition that fundamental rights are not subject to absolute availability, at the discretion of the legislator or the public administrator, testifies to the necessary effectiveness advocated by leading constitutionalism. 26 According not only to SARLET (2015) and SILVA, J., (2003) as well. 27 MELLO, C. A. B. de.: Eficácia das normas constitucionais e direitos sociais. 1st. edition. 4th. print run. São Paulo: Malheiros, 2015, p. 56. 28 TORRES, R. L.: O mínimo existencial, os direitos sociais e os desafios de natureza orçamentária. In: SARLET, I. W.; TIMM, L. B. (Orgs.).: Direitos Fundamentais: orçamento e “reserva do possível” . 2nd. edition revised and expanded. 2nd. print run. Porto Alegre: Livraria do Advogado, 2013, p. 64-67. 29 GOLDSCHMIDT, R.: O princípio da proibição do retrocesso social e sua função protetora dos direitos fundamentais. In: Seminário Nacional de Dimensões Materiais e Eficaciais dos Direitos Fundamentais. Chapecó: Editora Unoesc , 2011, p. 281

121